Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To summarize contemporary observations regarding the effects of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) on the brain. RECENT FINDINGS: The effects of HAART on the structure and function of the brain during HIV/AIDS is currently a subject of intense interest because the brain is one of the most drug-impenetrable organs that is infected by HIV-1 and as such represents an important reservoir for replication-competent virus. The effects of HAART on neurocognitive impairment caused by HIV-1 infection remain uncertain with both beneficial and adverse outcomes reported with different HAART regimens. Similarly, the effects of individual HAART regimens on viral quantity in cerebrospinal fluid as a surrogate indicator of brain virus burden are variable. Indeed, the situation is further complicated by the ranking of antiretroviral therapies (ARTs) by their central nervous system penetration-effectiveness score on the basis of ART concentrations in cerebrospinal fluid. Experimental studies have also yielded equivocal findings depending on the model and individual ART. At the same time, a burgeoning body of experimental data has demonstrated neurotoxic effects of several ARTs, including nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs), non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs) and protease inhibitors (PIs). SUMMARY: HAART selection strategies are currently guided by efficacy, resistance testing, toxicity, potential drug interactions and theoretical brain penetration. As improved strategies are developed to target the viral reservoir within the brain, greater knowledge of the effects of ARTs on neural tissues will be needed to operationalize their use in a rational manner that maximizes antiretroviral efficacy and minimizes the neurotoxic complications.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.006 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".